f

M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

Separate Reprinted from Volume IV, Part ι

FEBRUARY, 1 9 3 2

A G R E E K S W O R D S H E A T H FROM S O U T H RUSSIA / "yi \ "

B y G I S E L A M . A . R I C H T E R

/

/ i « . U 1 -'•· V/ ,· · \

Λ • f I i % f >

.. » .ι

, ( ' <

\

ι. .· \ ^

/

/ , ·

;

' ι 1 •• :

ν

I

• ·

J

\ •

' ' ' ι Κ

,1 , . 1 • \ - /- ' Λ ,·'

Ι I ' "" · / , ) -

V 1 , , ·

: ι ' ' I . ' ' 1 ; I

? • : J ' J. r- , : I; •

; 'ί

<

I— V '

[

.5 •:*>

,

/ . •

•

'"'Ν-Λ. y · · /

,

\ ' ' ,

- -

ν

ν ν . « I' V

\

• ; / /

Λ » - / > ' / . if - . - - " Ν

1 \ ' I . Λ

A G R E E K S W O R D S H E A T H F R O M S O U T H RUSSIA

B y G I S E L A M . A . R I C H T E R

One of the most important acquisitions recent-ly made by the Metropolitan Museum is the gold plate of a Greek sword sheath from South Russia (figs. 3, 4; length 21 nv in. | 54.5 cm.]; greatest width 6 in. 115.3 cm. |). A brief article on this sword sheath appeared in the Bulletin of The Metropolitan Museum of Art1 at the time of its acquisition, but as the subject brings up archaeological problems of much interest it is discussed here at greater length and with more adequate illustrations.2

The gold plate belongs to a class of Greek antiquities which has been found exclusively in South Russia; it is in fact the only important example of its kind outside the Hermitage in Leningrad. Fortunately the preservation is ex-

1 Richter, 1 9 3 1 , vol. X X V I , pp. 44 iT. Previous to its acquisition by the Museum it was illustrated in the Bulletin of the Bachstitz Gallery, 1929, p. 36 (with a short description by ( ! . Borovka) .

2 In my references to the literature of South Russian antiquities I have thought it best to confine myself almost exclusively to the books written in English, German, and French; fortunately enough has now been written in these languages to give a fairly com-prehensive picture and to make the handicap of not knowing Russian less serious.

'' When the sheath was received by the Museum parts of it were badly crushed; these have been carefully pressed out again.

4 A n analysis of the gold showed that two separate layers are present, the surface layer, 0.02 mm. thick, of purer gold, probably 22 carat (reddish in color), and the second layer, 0.145 mm. thick, of baser alloy (con-siderably yellower than the upper one). Samples taken from different parts of the under side gave results varying from 11 to 15.2 carats, the silver alloy being evidently not evenly distributed. The edges of the two layers can be differentiated in some places; but at-tempts to separate them proved unsuccessful, since they have become intimately attached to each other. As there is no trace of solder it is probable that the ap-plication of the purer gold layer was by a heat and hammer-welding process. A chemical analysis of the gold (composed of both layers) showed that it was

cellent, with only a few tears and holes,'5 and the gold has in no way deteriorated,1 so that we can appreciate the work almost as if it had been done yesterday, a rare circumstance in Greek art.

We shall begin with a description of it. The whole surface of the gold is decorated with em-bossed reliefs divided into two principal fields, that of the sheath proper and that of the side projection which served for fastening the sheath to the belt. On the sheath proper is represented a contest of Greeks and barbarians,5 presuma-bly Persians, composed in five principal groups. First comes a Greek warrior with outstretched hand, looking back probably at the compan-ions he has just left or is encouraging to fol-

alloyed with silver and copper: 63.46 per cent gold, 33.16 per cent silver, 3.38 per cent copper. The purer gold layer represents about of the total mass. (Anal-yses by Dr. Colin G . Fink and Arthur H . Kopp of Columbia University.)

5 They are probably not Scythians since there would be no purpose in supplying for the Scythian market a scene of strife between the Greeks and customers with whom they were on friendly terms of common self-interest (cf. below p. 1 1 7 ) . We may rather interpret the barbarians as Persians, the inveterate enemies of the Greeks, with whom the Scythians themselves fought during the invasion of Darius (so interpreted also by Schroder, Jahrbuch des deutschen arch. Inst., 1 9 1 1 , vol. X X V I , p. 285, and Benndorf, Jahrbuch der kunst-historischen Sammlung, 1890, vol. X I , p. 2 3 ) — u n l e s s the scene is mythological and represents Greeks and Trojans, which is possible since we know of cults of Achilles in this region and scenes from the life of Achilles are perhaps represented on the bow case from Nikopol (cf. below p. 1 25 ) . The costumes do not help to decide the question, for the Greeks represented all Oriental barbarians (Persians, Scythians, Amazons, Trojans) in a similar way. For the Persian costume and the names assigned to its different parts (χιτών χα-ριδο)τό? = sleeved tunic, κάνδυς = sleeved cloak, τιάρα, κνρβάσία, κιδα/jis, or πΐλος soft felt cap, άναζνρί&ζς = trousers), cf. G o w , /. II. S., 1928, vol. X L V I I I , pp. 144 ff.

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

l o w " - w h i l e a barbarian enemy is about to deal him a blow with a short sword from be-hind (fig. 4). The Greek wears a cuirass over his chiton, greaves, and a plumed Corinthian helmet and carries a spear and a shield; a sword hangs from his shoulder by a baldric. The bar-barian wears long trousers, a sleeved and belted tunic, shoes, and a headdress with long lappets; besides his sword he grasps a bow. The second group (fig. 4) consists of a young Greek who has sunk down wounded, a barbarian who is preparing to kill him with a spear, and another Greek who is grasping him by the arm to drag him to safety. The two Greek warriors are nude except for mantles draped loosely round them. The fallen one has lost his helmet, his limp hand is loosing its hold on the handle of his shield. His friend, who wears greaves and a Corinthian helmet, grasps a shield and a spear. The barbarian wears the characteristic trousers, belted tunic with long sleeves, shoes, and head-dress with lappets; his sleeved mantle7 is flying out behind him. In the next group (fig. 3) a Greek is attacking a barbarian who has fallen on his knees and is swinging his axe in defense; another barbarian has rushed to the latter's as-sistance with a long spear, but his horse has stumbled8 and he is pulling it up by the reins while he lifts his leg to dismount. The striding Greek has a chlamys and grasps his shield and short sword; his opponent wears the belted and

() On this gesture, cf. von Salis, p. 8, and the parallels there cited.

' Compare the sleeved mantles of the Persians on the "Alexander Sarcophagus" (Hamdy Hey and Reinach, pis. X X I X , X X X I [and our fig. 20 | and elsewhere).

This garment is called κάνδυ? by Xenophon (Educa-tion of Cyrus VI I I . iii. 1 0 ) ; cf. also C o w , loc. cit.

8 Unless we interpret the horse as kneeling down for his master to dismount in the way described for mount-ing by Xenophon On the Art of HorsemanshipV\.i6: το μλν επίστασθια νποβιβάζεσθαι τον ϊττττον, ώστε είπτετες εΐναι άναβηναι, ου μεμφόμεθα ( " W e take no exception to his understanding how to cause the horse to crouch for convenience in mounting" [ E . C . Marchant's trans-lation in the Loeb edit ion]) . Ebert, p. 173, interprets some of the horses on the shoulder of the Chertomlyk vase (cf. fig. 24) as being trained for this practice and

sleeved tunic, trousers, and headdress, and be-sides his axe he has a scabbard, which hangs from the shoulder by a baldric; the horseman wears trousers, tunic, headdress, and shoes; his horse has a saddlecloth with a decorated bor-der and a strap fastened round the breast. Next comes a group of two figures (fig. 3) skillfully composed to fill the narrowing field of the sheath: a fallen Greek, evidently wounded and in pain, and a companion administering first aid — grasping the bandaged leg as if to straight-en it (the end of the bandage9 is in his mouth). The latter wears an Attic helmet and an exo-mis which leaves one shoulder bare; the wound-ed man has a chlamys and a baldric by which his sword was suspended. This scene suggests that we have reached the outskirts of the bat-tlefield, as is indicated also by the concluding group (fig. 3) — a galloping horse and a fallen barbarian. The latter has just enough strength left to hold on to his horse's reins and let him-self be dragged out of the fray. He wears the typical trousers, long-sleeved tunic, and head-dress; he has no weapons; his horse still has its saddlecloth. The upper part of the mane is ren-dered by short, straight lines which give it the appearance of being hogged (like that ot the other horse), but near the saddle long hair is shown. The upper part is therefore presumably long also and conceived as hanging down on the further side.1" In the field is a Corinthian

calls it the "Persian custom" described by Xenophon in The Cavalry Commander 1 . 17 . But the "Persian fashion" there mentioned is "getting a leg-up with the help of Others" (τους γε μην πμεσβντέμονς τον ΙΙεμσι,κον τμοττον αναβά\\εσθαι inτ ι'ίΧλων ττροσεθίσας και τούτον; ωφελ?;σαις dv). The horse in our scene seems, however, to be stooping too far to pick himself up again.

9 Stephani in his publication of the Chertomlyk plate (see below) in Compte-rendu . . . 1864, p. 176, inter-prets the object as a knife; but its connection with the bandage wound round the leg is clear on our example. There may have been a wound in the knee so that the leg had to be straightened before it could be bandaged. 1 0 This suggests that the hogged manes of our other horse and those on the Chertomlyk silver vase (Wald-hauer, in Antike Den\maler, vol. IV , no. 9, pi. 46) are also in reality long. The crest of the helmet to the

F I G . I . S K E T C H M A P OF S O U T H R U S S I A S H O W I N G T H E S I T E S

OF T H E MOST I M P O R T A N T A R C H A E O L O G I C A L F I N D S

N K T A I I . IN K I K P I R T , " F O R M A Ι · : ORMIS Λ Μ Ί Ι Ι Π , " P I . , Χ

F I G . 2 . T H E E A S T E R N M E D I T E R R A N E A N AND T H E B L A C K SEA

AT T H E END OF T H E VI C E N T U R Y B. C.

M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S I 1 2

helmet, part of the debris of the battlefield. At the upper end of this scene is a decorative

design consisting of two lion-griffins (horned, winged lions) hcraldically grouped, a palmette above and below,and a rosette on each side (fig. 4). On the side projection of the sheath are two groups of animals (fig. 4): a lion who has jumped on a deer, and a lion-griffin on the back of a doe, biting its neck." Framing these two principal fields are rope and bead patterns. The edges of the plate are bent in and provided with holes for attachment to the scabbard, which was presumably of leather or wood.1"3

The figures of the contestants are beautifully modeled in a rich variety of poses skillfully adapted to the varying height of the sheath, and though designed in separate groups they convey successfully the medley of a strung-out battlefield with fierce hand-to-hand combats, limp figures of wounded men, and falling and runaway horses. The groups are closely knit, but there is no overcrowding and the design of the whole stands out effectively.The nude bod-ies of the Greeks form a pleasing contrast to the draped barbarians, and the helmets with their rich plumes, the leather headdresses with their flying lappets, the fluttering draperies, the long, obliquely placed spears, and the round shields combine to create a lively, varied whole. And the action is convincing. Whether attack-ing, defending, falling, prostrate, or dragged by a frightened horse, each figure is closely ob-served and rendered with a thorough knowl-edge of foreshortening. We may note as espe-cially successful figures the barbarian (second from the left) and the way in which the raised right arm is shown in the further distance (fig. 4) ; the young warrior (sixth from the left)

right of our horse is indicated by the same short, straight lines presumably intended for long hair. 1 1 As both deer and doe are covered with small inci-sions, they are probably meant to be of the fallow va-riety, which was indigenous in Ionia but is represent-ed also on Athenian vases (Furtwangler and Reich-hold, vol. II, p. 68, fig. 30) and is mentioned in Attic literature (Sophokles Oedipus Coloneus 1092;

striding forward, his body modeled in a series of contrasting planes; and the barbarian horse-man, his left arm pulling at the horse, his right, in the further distance, wielding his spear. And the figures of the fighting animals are no less successful, cramped though they had to be into the awkward, triangular space. The deer col-lapsing under the onslaught of the lion and the lion and griffin clutching at their prey are all rendered with fine understanding. Clearly we have here products of an art which has reached its maturity but has not yet lost its early fresh-ness and vigor. And our enjoyment of the work is undoubtedly enhanced by the material. The color of the metal, its glitter and high lights ijive it a richness not to be obtained in the more ο familiar, less precious materials.

Since this sword sheath was not unearthed during an official excavation its exact prove-nance is not known, but it is said to have been discovered near Nikopol on the lower Dnieper (cf. fig 1 ) , that is, in the steppes of South Rus-sia. With it are said to have been found sev-eral gold fragments — one, a small rectangular plaque with a griffin in relief and holes in the corners for attachment (fig.6), the others,parts of the hilt of a Scythian sword —two from the triangular member nearest the blade (fig. 5, bottom; cf. fig. 7) , the others from the bindings (fig. 5, top); to two pieces are still adhering corroded fragments of iron1'' from either the blade or the core of the hilt.

There can be no question as to the class of antiquities to which our sword sheath belongs. Besides its provenance, the shape with the side projection typical of scabbards from South Rus-sia11 (and Persia | fig. 8 |) makes the derivation obvious. Furthermore the lion-griffin is popular

Euripides Hippolytus 2 18) . 1 2 Actual examples of quivers and scabbards of leather and of wood have been preserved (cf. Ebert, pp. 126, 148, and Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, pi. VII I , 2) . 1 : ! On examination this was found to contain 82.6 per cent iron oxide (FeL>0;{), the remainder being earthy matter. (Analysis by Colin ( ί . F ink.) 1 4 "The scabbard with its side projection for the chains

F I G . 3 . GOLD P L A T E OF A S C Y T H I A N S W O R D S H E A T H . C O N T E S T O F G R E E K S A N D B A R B A R I A N S

G R E E K , E N D O F V C E N T U R Y B . C .

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

on works from this region1'' (and in Persia1'1) but rare elsewhere in the Greek world.1 ' And there is another important link. The scene of the contest of warriors with the heraldic grif-fins at one end occurs again on a similar gold plate (fig. 10) found in the Chertomlyk tomb ^ near Nikopol. The scenes are in fact practically identicall!) and must have been pressed over the same die; only in the chasing (that is, the orna-ments on the shields, helmets, weapons, saddle-cloths, and harness, and the lines on the hair, beards, plumes, feathers, horns, and the features of the faces), which was done free hand after the pressing, are there variations.

We have here, therefore, another case of du-plication such as was revealed in 1901 when General Brandenburg found a gold plate of a gorytos'" (fig. 1 1 ) at Ilyintsy1"'' (cf. fig. 1 ) , in

or straps by which the sworil was suspended from the warrior's belt, a type of scabbard convenient to cav-alrymen and regularly represented in Persian art" (Rostovtzefl, Iranians and Greeks, p. 55; cf. Flandin and Coste, vol. II, pi. 97). For other examples from South Russia, compare those from Melgunov's bar-row (Minns, p. 1 7 1 , fig. 65) and from Chertomlyk (idem, p. 164, fig. 53) , Kul-Oba ( idem , p. 203, fig. 98), Solokha (PolovtsofF, Rev. arch., 1914, series 4, vol. X X I I I , p. 185, fig. 1 3 ) , and Vettersfelde (Furt-wiingler, Vettersfelde, p. 36; Minns, p. 239, fig. 14) . 1 5 It occurs, for instance, on the coins of Pantikapaion of about 350 (f ig. 9) ; compare also the Chertomlyk and Ilyintsy gorytoi (figs. 1 1 , 1 2 ) , a silver gorytos from Solokha (Rostovtzefl, Iranians and Greeks, pi. X X I , ι ) , and the two aryballoi from Pantikapaion signed by the Athenian Xenophantos (Minns, p. 343, fig. 249; jacobsthal, Ornamente, p. 149, no. 286). 1 6 Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, pi. X V I , r. 1 ' On the lion-griffin in Greek art and its derivation through Persia from Babylon and Assyria, cf. Furt-wiingler, in Roscher's Lexicon, vol. I, part 2, cols. 1775 if., and Ziegler, in Real-Encyclopddie, vol. VII , col. 1929. The Persian type with bird's legs and tail was gradually transformed by the Greeks into the type with lion's legs and tail. 1 8 Minns, p. 164, fig. 53, and p. 286, fig. 207; Stephani, in Compte-rendu . . . 1864, pi. V, 1. 1 9 There is one curious variation in the two speci-mens, viz., in the drapery of the man dressing his companion's wounds (ninth from the left); but the surface on our sheath is damaged at this point. In our specimen the heads of both the heraldic griffins are

the district of Kiev, identical with the one from the Chertomlyk tomb (fig. 1 2 ) . " Roth are now in the Hermitage. The two gorytoi are identi-cal -except for the chasing —the subsidiary or-naments being likewise the same. In our sword sheath the decoration of the side projection is different from that on the Chertomlyk example, where there is only one group, a large eagle-griffin devouring the head of a deer.

That such duplicates could have been pro-duced only by means of a die (probably of bronze) over which the gold plate was pressed or hammered was pointed out by G. Kieseritzky at the time of the finding of the Ilyintsy plate."'1

The original die not being extant and the gold plates themselves being too thin to serve as dies,J 1 there can of course be no question of such duplication in modern times. The au-

preserved as is also the palmette above them. The Chertomlyk plate is not broken between the rider and the stooping figure, and the hands of the barbarian at-tacking with a spear (fifth figure from the left) have been preserved. 2 0 From γωρντός—a Scythian specialty — a quiver and bow case combined. The word occurs in the Od-yssey XXI .54 with the meaning of "bow case." 2 1 Pharmakovsky, in Sborniipp. 45- 1 18 ; Kieseritzky, Arch. Anz., 1903, vol. X V I I I , col. 83; Minns, pp. 287, xxxix. There are many cases, of course, of duplication among the small gold plaques found in large numbers in Scythian tombs. 2 2 Minns, p. 164, fig. 53; Stephani, Compte-rendu . . . 1864, pi. IV. 2;i Arch. Anz., 1903, vol. X V I I I , cols. 83-84. 2 4 Pharmakovsky, in his article on the gold mount-ings of the bow cases from the Ilyintsy and Chertom-lyk barrows, in Sbornik^, pp. 45-1 18 (analyzed by Minns, p. xxxix) , suggests that the Chertomlyk plate was beaten over the Ilyintsy one. But the latter is so thin that it would certainly have lost its shape with such treatment, unless it was laid over the original die during this process. But there would seem to be no sense in doing this instead of working the Chertom-lyk plate directly over the die. Also, if the Chertomlyk plate was made over the Ilyintsy one the figures in the former should be slightly larger than those on the latter, which Miss Μ. I. Maximova informs me is not the case. In our sword sheath the figures are of exactly the same dimensions as those on the Chertomlyk one. Dr. R. Zahn has made the suggestion that separate stamps were used in the making of these plates, as in-

F I G . 4 D E T A I L OF T H E S W O R D S H E A T H S H O W N I N F I G U R E 3

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

thenticity of our example is also borne out by a technical consideration; for the peculiarity which we observed in it (see p. 109) —that it was made of two separate layers, an upper one reddish in color, the purer in composition of the two, and a lower one, yellowish in color, of a baser alloy —is characteristic also of the Chertomlyk sword sheath and the Chertomlyk and Ilyintsy gorytoi25; and analyses made of the two gorytoi (by Pharmakovsky) showed that they also were alloys oi gold, silver, and

clicated by the close resemblance oi two figures on the Chertomlyk gorytos (the reclining youth on the far-thest right in the top row and the seated youth, the third from the right in the second row). If his theory is correct the stamps were presumably used 111 the clay model for the original die. L>° Miss Maximova kindly wrote me in May, 1931, that "the color of the gorytoi and of the sword sheath is

dates for any class of Greek antiquities been so great as in the case of these objects-probablybe-cause these South Russian antiquities, having all been found in one general region and harbored in one country, were studied only by Graeco-Scythian experts, and were therefore not ex-posed like other Greek products to intensive investigation from widely varying quarters. It is only recently that Greek archaeologists have studied this intricate subject in earnest.27

Since our Museum has now acquired a speci-men of this class we must enter the arena and take a small part in the contest in so far as its

F I G . 5 . F R A G M E N T S OF T H E H I L T OF A S C Y T H I A N SWORD

F O U N D W I T H T H E SWORD S H E A T H S H O W N I N F I G U R E 3

copper."" Such a technical correspondence could hardly have been achieved by a forger.

Obviously our sword sheath must be of the same date as the Chertomlyk example. But here a difficulty confronts us, for the objects from the Chertomlyk tomb - for instance the sword plate, the quiver case, and the famous silver vase and bowl — have been dated in widely va-rying periods by different archaeologists. Sel-dom, in fact, has confusion in the assignment of

F I G . 6 . P L A Q U E W I T H A G R I F F I N

F O U N D W I T H T H E SWORD S H E A T H

S H O W N I N F I G U R E 3

issues directly affect our specimen. Briefly stated, the situation is this. Far away

in South Russia (cf. fig. i ) , both north of the Black Sea (in the regions of Kiev and the lower and middle Dnieper) and east of it (in the KLI-ban district), in many cases at considerable dis-tances from the Greek colonies on the Bos-phorus (Pantikapaion,Chersonesos,Olbia,etc.), there have been found numerous mounds, the graves of ancient barbarian chieftains. Excava-tions were begun over a hundred years ago and have been carried on systematically ever since

exactly as you described it — reddish on the upper part and yellow on the inside." 2 6 The percentage of silver is there higher than in our sword sheath. Ilyintsy gorytos: gold 49.3; silver 47.6; copper 1.4. Chertomlyk gorytos: gold 48.1; silver 47.2; copper 2.2. The Chertomlyk sword sheath has not been analyzed. 2 ' See below, p. 122.

A G R E E K S W O R D S H E A T H F R O M S O U T H R U S S I A 1 1 7

the foundation of the Russian Imperial Archae-ological Commission in 1859; an<^ a r c

proceeding at the present time. Many of the tombs were plundered in antiquity, but rarely completely, and a few have come to light prac-tically intact. They reveal the civilization of a people corresponding in a surprising fashion to

M I N N S , " S C Y T H I A N S A N D G R E E K S , " P . 1 6 3 , F I G . 5 2

F I G . 7 . S C Y T H I A N SWORD F R O M T H E

C H E R T O M L Y K T O M B . T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

the description of the Scythians given by Herod-otos in the fourth book of his history. It will be remembered that he tells how in a country "level, grassy, and well-watered" by large riv-ers'""' lived a people "with no established cities or fortresses," composed of mounted archers and cattle-rearing nomads "who carried their dwellings on wagons.""1' These people were not autochthonous but were preceded by the Cim-2 8 § 47· 2 9 § 46· 30 Idem, I V . 1 1 ; the name is preserved in "Crimea."

merians,:!0 and beyond their frontiers dwelt such fabled tribes as "the one-eyed Arimaspians," "the griffins that guard gold," and "the Hyper-boreans whose territory reaches to the sea."'11

They continually made war upon their neigh-bors; but with the Greeks they were apparently on friendly terms, at first jealously retaining

j j J ^ J

F L A N D I N A N D C O S T F , ' V O Y A G E E N P E R S E , " V O L . I I , P I . . 9 7

F I G . 8 . D E T A I L OF T H E F R I E Z E

OF T H E H A L L OF X E R X E S AT P E R S E P O L I S

their own c u s t o m s , b u t gradually coming to some extent at least under Greek influence.'*'1

Indeed according to one legend the inhabitants of Scythia were descendants of Herakles, who came to that country driving the cattle of Ger-yon, and a serpent woman, "a creature of dou-ble form . . . above the buttocks a woman, be-low them a snake." '4 They had curious bar-baric customs such'as using their enemies' skulls 31 Idem, IV. 13 . 3 a Idem, IV.76. 33 Idem, IV.78. 3 4 Idem, IV.9.

M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S I 12

for cups3'' and their enemies' skins for napkins or quiver covers,36 and they drank blood and wine out of a large cup when they solemnized an oath."7 But particularly noteworthy was their method of burying their kings: "They carry the king's body on a waggon . . . to the land of the Gerrhi . . . and having laid him in the tomb on a couch, they plant spears all round the body and lay across them wooden planks, which they then roof over with hides; in the open space which is left in the tomb they bury, after strangling, one of the king's concu-

C OURT1 S Y (11 <.. VAN' OK ST 1111 I.. "Stl.l CT GREI Κ COINS." PL. I.XI, Nil. 4

F I G . 9 . L I O N - G R I F F I N ON Λ COLD S T A T E R

F R O M Ρ Α Ν Τ Ι Κ Λ Ρ Λ Ι Ο Χ , E N L A R G E D

A B O U T 3 5 O B . C . B R I T I S H M U S E U M

bines, his cupbearer, his cook, his groom, his squire, and his messenger, besides horses, and first fruits of all else, and golden cups; for the Scythians make no use of silver or bronze. Hav-ing done this they all build a great barrow of earth vying jealously with one another to make this as great as may be."3 8And after the lapse of a year fifty of the king's best attendants and fifty of the finest horses were slain and the youths impaled on the horses and then set on guard in a circle round the king's tomb.39

When, therefore, the Russian excavators found in the very country described by Herod-otos tombs covered with mounds containing ο the skeletons of the king and his women, serv-

ants, and horses, surrounded by a rich array of objects —in which gold played a conspicuous part, and on which there were representations of men in barbarian (i.e., non-Greek) costumes engaged in fighting, hunting, and taming horses (and even scenes of a drinking cere-mony1") as well as of griffins and serpent women-there could be no doubt that these were the remains of Herodotos' Scythians. Al-lowing for a little exaggeration (such as the story of the fifty impaled youths), the corre-spondence was complete.

It remained to assign dates to these burials. They were clearly not all of the same period. The earliest contained objects of a decoratively effective, barbaric style, which could be identi-fied as purely Scythian and assigned to the sev-enth and sixth centuries. The mounds of Kel-ermes41 and Kostromskaya 42 in the Kuban be-long to this class.The objects from the mounds

''Idem, IV.65. Herodotos' description brings out clearly the "barbarian" character of the Scythians: "The heads themselves, not of all but of their bitter-est foes, they treat in this wise. Each saws off all the part beneath the eyebrows, and cleanses the rest. If he be a poor man, then he does but cover the outside with a piece oi raw hide, and so makes use of it; but ii he be rich, he covers the head with the raw hide, and gilds the inside ot it and so uses it for a drinking-cup. Such cups a man makes also of the head of his own kinsman with whom he has been at feud, and whom he has worsted in a suit before the king: and ο 1

if guests whom he honours visit him he will serve them with these heads, and show how the dead were his kinsfolk who made war upon him and were wor-sted by him; this they call manly valour."(Translations here and below by A . D. Godley, in the Loeb edition.) ^ldem, IV.64. :!T Idem, IV.70. ::s Idem, IV.71. :!!>Idem, IV.72. 4 0 cf. Rostovtzeff", Iranians and Greeks, pi. X X I I I , 3, p. 106. 41 Idem, pis. λΊ - ΙΧ ; Borovka, Scythian Art, pi. 12. 4 2 Minns, pp. 224 if.; compare also the interesting find made in Zoldhalompuszta, Hungary, described by N . Fettich, La Trouvaille scythe de Zoldhalompuszta pres de Miskole, Ilongrie (review by S. R. with some illustrations in Rev. arch., 1929, series 5, vol. X X I X , pp. 205-207, including a deer from Tapioszentmarton, also from I lungary).

F I G . 1 0 . G O L D P L A T E OF A S C Y T H I A N S W O R D S H E A T H F O U N D I N T H E C H E R T O M L Y K T O M B

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

of the Seven Brothers4 5 and from Maikop, " in the Kuban, were partly Scythian, partly late archaic Greek of the early fifth century.4''Greek contact and influence had by that time clearly begun. The most important tombs —those, for instance, of Chertomlyk (figs. 12, 24), Kul-Oba (figs. 26, 28), Solokha (figs. 13, 25), and Voronezh4<>-contained besides Scythian ob-jects many worked in the Greek style of the developed period. The subjects were largely Scythian — Scythians hunting, fighting, string-ing a bow, bandaging a companion's leg, etc.; but the style was unmistakably Greek. The nu-merous stylistic connections between the ob-jects of these various mounds show that they were produced during approximately the same period. It must have been a time when Greek influence in Scythia was strong, contact close, and Greek art at a high point of development.

When was this period ? The answer is im-portant, not only for our appreciation of Greek art-that we may know during what time the Greek goldsmiths' work attained so high a level — but for our knowledge of Greek history. At what time were Scythian chiefs powerful and prosperous enough to have Greek artists supply them with such masterpieces, worked not for a

4:! Minns, pp. 206 ΓΓ. 4 4 cf. The Ercole Canessa Collection, no. 120 (now in Philadelphia); Alexander, Bulletin of the Metropoli-tan Museum, vol. X X , pp. 180 f., hg. 7; and other pieces from the same find now in Berlin (shortly to he published by R. Zahn). 4j> Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, pi. XI I f . 46 Ibid., frontispiece. 4l Compte-rendu . . . 1864, passim. 4 8 cf., e.g., Fowler and Wheeler, p. 335, and other gen-eral handbooks on Greek art. 4 9 cf. especially pp. 95 ff.: "I maintain and I have often essayed to prove that they | i.e., the chief Scythian tombs I form a chronological unit, that they all belong to the same period, that none of them is earlier than the end of the fourth century or later than the second half of the third, a period of a hundred years more or less." He adheres to this dating in his S\ythien und der Bosporus, vol. I, just published ( 1 9 3 1 ) , though he agrees that specific pieces may antedate the burials. 5 0 cf. p. 162: "Die Hauptmasse aller reichen Graber Siidrusslands, der skythischen wie der griechischen,

general public but directly for Scythian clients ? It is to this question that the answer of archae-ologists has been so varied.

Ludolf Stephani in his publication of the ob-jects from the Chertomlyk tomb in 1865 '' as-signed them to the fourth century B.C., and this dating was accepted by most archaeologists for some time.48 Later the tendency was to date the objects, at least those of the Chertomlyk tomb, in the early Hellenistic period, that is, the late fourth and third centuries B. C. Rostov-tzeff in his epoch-making book, Iranians and Greeks in South Russia (1922), takes this view, basing on it his reconstruction of the history of South Russia.49 The same view was sponsored by M. Ebert in his Siidrussland im Altertum (1921 ) 5 0 ; by N. Kondakof, J. Tolstoi, and S. Reinach in Antiquites de la Russie meridionale (French edition, 1 8 9 1 ) ' 1 ; Ε. H. Minns, in his Scythians and Greeks ( 1913) '"; B. Graef in "Archaologische Beitrage" ( 1901)" 3 ;and E.von Stern, in his "Griechencolonien des Schwarz-meergebietes" (i9i5).> 4 Pharmakovsky in the Archaologischer Anzeiger for 1914'''' even went so far as to assign the Kul-Oba and Chertomlyk burials to the second century B. C.5<>

But here and there other opinions, favoring

fiillt in einen verhaltnismassig kurzen Zeitraum, nam-lich in die Periode von der Mitte des 4. bis zur Mitte des 3. Jahrhunderts, als die pontischen Steppenlander einen wirtschaftlichen und kulturellen Aufschwung erlebten, wie weder vorher noch nachher. In dieser Bliitezeit sind die meisten der skythischen Goldkur-gane entstanden." •)X Page 295: "Cette reproduction [of the Chertomlyk silver vase | . . . montre a quel haut degre l'art grec de la fin du IVe et au commencement du IIIe siecle av. ). C. excellait a traiter les sujets de genre." 5 2 Page 289; see also Riegl, p. 234. 53 Hermes, 1901, vol. X X X V I , pp. 86 ff. 04 Hermes, 1915, vol. L, p. 191 and passim. 5 5 Vol. X X I X , pp. 283-290. :,(i The Solokha burial, however, he assigned to the second half of the fifth or the first half of the fourth century B.C.; S. Polovtsoff in her publication of this burial in the Revue arch cologicjue for 1914 assigned it to the second half of the fourth century (p. 190) and its masterpiece, the gold comb, to the middle of that century (p. 178) .

F I G . I I . GOLD P L A T E OF A GORYTOS F O U N D AT I L Y I N T S Y

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

F I G . 1 2 . GOLD P L A T E OF A GORYTOS F O U N D I N T H E C H E R T O M L Y K T O M B

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D . F R O M AN F.L LI G T R O T Y P E

I 1 2 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

an earlier dating for individual objects at least, made themselves heard. As long ago as 1889 and 1892 C. Robert and A. Furtwangler postu-lated a date at the end of the fifth century for the Chertomlyk gorytos " and the large silver vase58 (fig. 24). More recently R. Zahn'9 and P. Jacobsthal,;° have dated the Chertomlyk sil-ver vase about 400 B. c.''1 O. Waldhauer, in his splendid publication of the Chertomlyk silver vase in the Antike De/il^maler, volume IV

REVUE ARCHEOLCXilQUE, I914, SERIES 4, vol.. XXIII, PL. VI

I IC. 1 3 . D E T A I L F R O M A S I L V E R V A S E F R O M T H E

T O M B OF S O L O K H A . T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

(1929),62 likewise assigned it to about 400 B.C., the evidence to be presented in detail in an article by K. Malkina in the Jahrbuch ties dent-schen archaoligischen Instituts. The same dat-ing is now favored by other Russian scholars in

5 7 Robert, Arch. Anz., 1889, vol. IV , col. 1 5 1 . ")8 Furtwangler, Arch. Anz., 1892, vol. V I I , col. 1 1 5 . Followed, e.g., by Schreiber, p. 418, and Liier and Creutz, vol. II, p. 25. cf. also Benndorf, jahrbuch der \unsthistorischen Sammlung, 1890, vol. X I , p. 23, where the Chertomlyk sword sheath is dated in the fifth century. 5 9 Furtwangler and Reichhold, vol. I l l , p. 206. 00 Ornamente, p. 223. 6 1 cf. also Schede, p. 65. 6 3 Page 90. (i:! During my stay in Leningrad in the summer of 1930 I had occasion to have many conversations on this subject with the archaeologists in the Hermitage. They are convinced that the objects from the tombs here discussed should be assigned to about 400 B. C. ('4 Ebert, pp. 161- 162. (i·' In the Chertomlyk tomb, for instance, was found

this field, not only for isolated objects but for the whole contents of the chief tombs of the developed period —for example Chertomlyk, Kul-Oba, Solokha, Voronezh.63

Such wide differences of opinion can exist only because our evidence is largely stylistic. The Scythians evidently buried in their tombs Greek gold and silver but not often the more easily datable coins and vases. Only compara-tively rarely have the latter found their way into important Scythian burials<>4; and when they did,60 the early excavators took little no-tice of what to us are such important land-marks for dating. We must see what light is shed on this problem of chronology by the sword sheath which is the subject of this arti-cle. As sculpture on a small scale we shall rry to place it stylistically where it belongs.

The nearest parallels to the composition of the battle scene with its vigorous, compact groups are to be found on the friezes of the Phigaleia temple and of the Nereid and Gjol-baschi monuments, all products of the late fifth century. It is there that we find the same force-ful action as in our figures. The contest scenes ο of the Mausoleum friezes (middle of the fourth century), on the other hand, are more loosely

a fragment of a black-glazed vase with a stamped ornament (cf. Minns, p. 349, fig. 254) later used as an argument for a second-century dating; but we know now that black-glazed Athenian ware with stamped ornaments occurs as early as the fifth century (cf., e.g., Technau, Ath. Mitt., 1929, vol. L I V , p. 44, fig. 32, 1 ; Beazley, pi. X L , 10; Jacobsthal, Die mehschen Reliefs, pp. 1 1 5 f.). There were also found in the Chertomlyk tomb — as Miss Maximova kindly informed me (in May, 1 9 3 1 ) — several amphora handles: one inscribed j can be dated in the third cen-

tury B.C., but it has no value for the dating of the tomb, as it was found in the upper lay-

ers of the barrow, not in the tomb itself.

Κ

Another handle inscribed = Α στνόάμας ?

or 'Αστνμήδης? was found in the tomb itself and is therefore valuable evidence. Here the letters are of older forms and could well be dated as early as the late fifth or early fourth century.

F I G . 1 5 . S T R I D I N G W A R R I O R F R O M T H E

P H I G A L E I A F R I E Z E . B R I T I S H M U S E U M

F I G . 1 4 . S T R I D I N G W A R R I O R F R O M T H E

SWORD S H E A T I I S H O W N I N F I G U R E 3

F I G . L 6 . F A L L I N G H O R S E F R O M T H E SWORD S H E A T H

S H O W N IN F I G U R E 3

U . Γ. MAN SI I.L PHOTOGRAPH F I G . 1 7 . F A L L I N G H O R S E F R O M T H E

P H I G A L E I A F R I E Z E . B R I T I S H M U S E U M

F I G . Τ 8 . S T R I D I N G W A R R I O R F R O M T H E

SWORD S H E A T H S H O W N I N F I G U R E } F I G . IC). G R E E K W A R R I O R F R O M T H E F R I E Z E

OF T H E H E R O O N OF G J O L B A S C H I . A B O U T 4 2 0 - 4 1 0 B. C.

K U N S T H I S T O R I S C H E S M U S E U M , V I E N N A

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

composed and the action much less vigorous; the figures there make the impression of being posed for a contest rather than actually engaged in it. On the Alexander Sarcophagus (end of the fourth century) the composition is more crowded than in our scene, the effect of a bat-tle being obtained by the numerous figures and by the resultant confusion; each figure no long-er stands out as a separate design but is lost in the medley of the whole.

We can illustrate these comparisons by spe-cific instances. The fallen Greek supported by

P H O T O G R A P H B Y S E B A H A N D J O A I L L I E R

F I G . 2 0 . G R E E K ANI) P E R S I A N W A R R I O R S F R O M T H E

" A L E X A N D E R S A R C O P H A G U S . " E N D OF IV C E N T U R Y R. C.

M U S E E S D ' A N T I Q U I T E S , I S T A N B U L

his companion 011 our plate (fig. 4) may be compared with a similar figure on the Phiga-leia frieze1'6; our striding warrior (fig. 14) with the magnificent warriors on the same frieze (fig. 1 5 ) ; our falling horse (fig. 16) with a similar figure there (fig. 17) ; our warrior with right hand outstretched (fig. 18) with one in the same attitude on the Gjolbaschi monument (fig. 19) ; our protecting warrior (fig. 4) with a figure in a similarly constrained pose on the

• Nereid re l ie f " ; and so forth.

The same similarities and contrasts may be observed in the modeling of the figures. The bodies of our warriors are designed in a few contrasting planes, clearly distinguished from

one another, giving the whole a quiet largeness of effect. The same is true of the Phiraleia ο frieze, the Nereid monument, and the Gjol-baschi Heroon. But this restrained, map-like modeling is no longer found on the Mausoleum monument, and still less on the Alexander Sar-cophagus (fig. 20). In the latter each plane is made to glide into the adjoining one without the same clear demarcation. The conception is more naturalistic, more closely observed from life, less guided by a feeling for design.

Furthermore, the draperies on our sheath, with their comparatively few, clearly defined folds, find close parallels on the Phigaleia frieze and the stele of Dexileos (about 394). There too the tunics are pulled over the girdles to form effective lights and shadows, and the mantles fly backward in decorative fashion. Even on the sculptures (first quarter of the fourth century) of the Asklepios temple at Epidauros the ren-dering is more naturalistic; the folds are more numerous and their directions have multiplied.

Finally, our lion group (fig. 4) resembles that on the coins of Akanthos*'* struck after 424 (fig. 23), and our deer may be compared with those on the coins of Kaulonia of about 40ο1'9 which have a markedly similar rendering of the head.

Since the same die was used for our sword sheath and the example found in the Chertom-lyk tomb (fig. 10), it follows that the two must be approximately contemporary with each other and with the gorytos (fig. 12) , the large silver vase (fig. 24) and bowl, and the other objects from that burial — allowing of course a certain margin, since some objects might have been in use a considerable time before burial, others re-cently made. It would lead us too far to enu-merate here the parallels offered by these ob-jects with products of the late fifth and early fourth century, and such analysis will more properly come from the Russian archaeologists

6 6 Smith, vol. I, p. 286, no. 540. 67 Monumenti dull' Institute.>, 1874-1878, vol. X , pi. X I V , 0 , 41. 6 8 Richter, Animals, fig. 17. f i9 Ibid., fig. 147.

A C R E E K S W O R D S H E A T H E R O M S O U T H R U S S I A 1 2 5

now studying these problems.'" We shall only mention in passing the striking resemblances (which have repeatedly been pointed out) ot some of the female figures on the gorytos71

(fig. 12) to the goddesses of the Parthenon pedi-ments and the women on the Gjolbaschi re-liefs , J ; of the band of palmettes and lotos flow-ers below the scene to those on the capitals of the Erechtheion.7:!

Nor can we discuss here the close stylistic re-lations of the objects from the Chertomlyk'1

tombs to one another, except to mention the new evidence offered by our sword sheath, namely the similarity between the lion killing the deer on the side projection of our plate (fig. 4) and the lions on one of the Solokha vases "s (fig. 13 ) ; and between our deer and doe (fig. 4) and the deer on the Chertomlyk silver vase79 (fig. 24).

Such similarities of the objects of these tombs to one another and to other monuments are best explained by the fact that they all belong approximately to the same period, beginning

F I G . 2 1 . P E R S I A N W A R R I O R F R O M T H E

SWORD S H E A T H S H O W N I N F I G U R E 3

(cf. figs. 10, 12) , Kul-Oba7 , (cf. figs. 26, 28), Solokha71' (cf. figs. 13, 25), and Voronezh" 7 0 In the summer of 1930 I was informed that the archaeologists of the Hermitage have in preparation a Corpus Tumulorum which should bring before us the evidence in much clearer form than before. ' 1 C . Robert's interpretation of the reliefs on this gorytos as scenes from the life of Achilles (Arch. Anz., 1889, vol. IV, col. 1 5 1 ) is in my opinion still the best so far advanced; and it has in its favor also the fact that Achilles was a popular hero in the Pontic regions, enjoying local cults in several places (Dion Chrysos-tomos X X X V I . 9 , 14, 25; Alkaios 14 [Diehl]; Pindar Nemean IV.49; Ebert, pp. 275-276). 7 2 cf. especially Benndorf, jahrbuch der \unsthistori-schen Sammlung, 1889, vol. of plates, pi. VII, A, 1. 7:5 Stevens et al., pis. X X X V I , X X X V I I . The rich gar-land above this band, which is sometimes used as an

W . F . M A N S I . L I . P H O T O G R A P H

F I G . 2 2 . A M A Z O N F R O M T H E P H I G A L E I A F R I E Z E

B R I T I S H M U S E U M

with the late fifth century and lasting into the early fourth.

argument for a late dating, has also early parallels such as the sima of the Tholos at Delphi, dated in the late fifth or early fourth century (Charbonneaux, Fouilles de Delphes, vol. II, fasc. 4, figs. 9 - 1 1 ) . 7 4 Minns, pp. 155 if. 7 ) Idem, pp. 195 ff. 7 6 Pharmakovsky, Arch. Anz., 1914, vol. X X I X , col. 260-292; Polovtsofi, Rev. arch., 1914, series 4, vol. X X I I I , pp. 164-190, pis. I-XI. ' ' Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, frontispiece; Ebert, p. 174, fig. 68. 7 8 Polovtsoff, Rev. arch., 1914, series 4, vol. X X I I I , pis. V , VI, VII I ; Pharmakovsky, Arch. Anz., 1914, vol. X X I X , col. 270, fig. 90. 7 9 Waldhauer, in Anti\e Den\maler, vol. IV, no. 9, pp. 86, 87.

I 1 2 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

But does this dating fit into the historical pic-ture? In my opinion better than the later one, for several difficulties encountered in the late dating are thereby removed. Thus the great Scythian tombs correspond so closely to the de-scriptions by Herodotos (about 450) because they are not far removed from him in time.80

Such masterpieces as our sword sheath, the Chertomlyk silver vase81 (fig. 24), the Solokha comb82 (fig. 25),the Kul-Oba gold vase8'! (fig. 28) and ivories84 (cf. fig. 26) were produced

F I G . 2 3 . S I L V E R T E T R A D R A C I I M OF A K A N T I I O S

A F T E R 4 2 4 B . C . M U S E U M OF F I N E A R T S , BOSTON

E N L A R G E D F R O M A CAST

not during the decline but at the acme of Greek art; they are not anomalies but have their peers in contemporary art. The figures on the Kul-

8 0 The fifty years or so involved probably brought about changes in the direction of a more settled form ο of life and the use of silver as well as gold utensils. 8 1 Waldhauer, in Anti\e Den\maler, vol. IV , no. 9, pp. 83-90, pis. 44-46.

Pharmakovsky, Arch. Anz., 1914, vol. X X I X , col. 263-264, figs. 87, 88; Polovtsolf, Rev. arch., 1914 , series 4, vol. X X I I I , pis. I, II ; Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, pi. X I X . 8 3 Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks, pi. X X I I ; Minns, pp. 200-201, figs. 93, 94. 8 4 Minns, pp. 204 A-D, figs. 100-103. 8·' Compare especially the chariot groups on the signed hydria in the British Museum; Furtwangler and Reichhold, vol. I, pis. 8, cj. s , i "It was perhaps owing to the cheapness of gold at Pantikapaion that the stater attained there the exces-

Oba ivories are so strikingly similar to the Mei-dian vases8'' of the late fifth century because they are approximately contemporary.

And this brings us to the next momentous question. Where was this gold work in pure Greek style and yet clearly intended for the Scythian market produced? Various answers have been given. Some have suggested Athens as the source,others Ionia, still others the Greek colonies of the Bosphorus (cf. fig. 2). It would not seem possible for an artist in continental Greece or Asia Minor, far removed from the Russian steppes, to represent the intimate scenes of Scythian life which we find in some of these products. The makers must have been near at hand, cognizant by experience of Scythian cus-toms. Moreover, the material points to manu-facture in the region of South Russia8,1 where gold was evidently plentiful. On the other hand if the Greeks of Pantikapaion and the other Greek colonies had had native artists of the same caliber as the creators of the masterpieces from the Scythian graves, should we not have found in these Greek cemeteries more objects of comparable importance ? These tombs have indeed produced a number of masterpieces — for instance the polychrome sphinx and the Aphrodite vase8' — but among them some, such as the two aryballoi signed by Xenophantos the Athenian88 and the engraved gems by Dex-amenos of Chios,81' are demonstrably by for-

sive weight of 140 grs." ; Head, p. 281 . For a contrary opinion, however, cf. Minns (quoting Bertier-de-la-Garde) , p. 631 . Natural sources of supply would be the Ural Mountains, Thrace (Pangaion Mountains), Transylvania, and the Altai Mountains. Perhaps such gold was imported in exchange for exports of cereals, hides, slaves, etc. (cf. Minns, pp. 440-441). 8 7 From Phanagoria; cf. Minns, pp.344, 345, figs. 250, 25 1 ; reproduced in color by Pharmakovsky, in Za-piski, 192 1 , part 1 , pis. I-III. 8 8 From Pantikapaion; Minns, p. 343, fig. 24c); Jacob-sthal, Ornamente, p. 149, note 286. The inscription, Hev0</>avTos eVoiV;crev Αθηναίος, on the second aryballos was discovered by Waldhauer in 1920. The vase is to be published by R . Zahn and O. Waldhauer in the Arch. Mitt, aus russ. Sammlungen. 8 9 From jiiz-Oba and T a m a n ; Minns, p. 4 13 , figs. 299,

F I G . 2 4 . D E T A I L OF A S I L V E R A M P I I O S A F R O M T H E C H E R T O M L Y K T O M B

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

RFVl'l ARC! OGIQtE, 1914, SKRIES 4, VOL. XXIII, PL. I

F I G . 2 5 . GOLD C O M B

F R O M T H E T O M B OF S O L O K H A

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

MINNS, SC YTHIANS AND GREEKS, FIG. 2 6 . D E T A I L OF T H E IVORY V E N E E R OF A C O F F I N

F R O M T H E K U L - O B A T O M B

T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

F I G . 2 8 . D E T A I L OF A GOLD V A S E F R O M T H E

K U L - O B A T O M B . T H E H E R M I T A G E , L E N I N G R A D

F R O M AN E L E C T R O T Y P E

F I G . 2 9 . GOLD COIN

F R O M P A N T I K A P A I O N

E N L A R G E D F R O M A CAST

F I G . 2 7 . GOLD C O I N

F R O M P A N T I K A P A I O N

E N L A R G E D F R O M A CAST

I 1 2 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

eign artists resident in the colonies, and others, such as the red-figured vases, we know to have been imported from Athens. And aside from such outstanding,probably foreign,products the contents of the graves do not measure up in importance to those of the Scythian magnates. Moreover, the gold coins of Pantikapaion with heads of satyrs (figs. 27, 29) related in type to the Kul-Oba Scythians (cf. fig. 28) are of a later, more realistic style90 (as shown, for in-stance, in the modeling of the forehead). The explanation that best fits the case would seem to be that the originators of the fine gold and silver products of Greek style91 found in the Scythian graves were artists living on the Bosphorus but not native there, artists who had in fact migrated to the Bosphorus on purpose to work for the wealthy Scythians. And here history helps us. The late fifth century and the early fourth is the time of the end and after-math of the Peloponnesian War. Athens had been impoverished and her many gifted artists, finding little employment at home, had to search for clients elsewhere. What more natu-ral than that some should make their way to the Black Sea, where Perikles had visited Si-nope92 and exacted tribute from Nymphaion9,5

and perhaps other colonies in 4^5,91 where the Athenian fleet had made an expedition in 424

300. For evidence of Ionic contact compare also the Ionic genitive EFME12 on a kylix from Kul-Oba; Minns, p. 383. The fact that the mantles of the figures on the Chertomlyk gorytos and sword sheath regular-ly conceal the male organ has been taken as an indica-tion of Ionic workmanship. But as Oraet (Hermes, 1901, vol. X X X V I , pp. 92-93) pointed out, the figures 011 the Gjolbaschi and Nereid monuments are com-pletely draped — in accordance with Eastern prefer-ence— not only partly so, as on the South Russian re-liefs. The renderings on the latter are best explained as made to conform with Scythian taste. 9 0 The dates are a little before 350 (cf. fig. 27) and twenty years or so later (cf. fig. 29) (E. S. G . Robin-son of the British Museum; cf. also Regling, p. 38). Before that time the staters of Kyzikos constituted the staple of gold currency in the whole region of the Black Sea. 9 1 Those in the Scythian style must, of course, have

under Lamachos,95 and with which Athens was indeed in the closest commercial relations since she obtained from there her chief supply of grain.9<> Similarly Ionia had founded several colonies on the Black Sea in the early days and must also have been affected by the long-drawn-out hostilities of the Peloponnesian War. It would hardly seem possible to judge stylistical-ly in all cases between Athens and Ionia at this period when Greek art had become individual and national rather than local. Probably both countries, as well as others, supplied their quota of artistic talent. Such good customers as the Scythians must have attracted the adventurous talent of a variety of places.

We may date our gold sheath, then, at the end of the fifth or the beginning of the fourth century B. C., when Greek art was still at the height of its development, and tentatively as-sign it to an artist who, as a result of the Pelo-ponnesian War, had left his native city and found employment far away with a Scythian chieftain. For us it bears witness not only to the consummate work of Greek craftsmen but to the appreciation of their products through-out the ancient world, even among the north-ern barbarians. And it is a revelation of Greek sculpture in an unfamiliar material — that of precious, glittering gold.

been worked by native Scythians. 9 2 Plutarch Verikles 20. 9 3 Krateros, Fragment 12; Aischines Against Ktesi-phon 17 1 ; /. G., I", 63, line 190. 94/. G., I", 63, lines 203 fT. (conjectural). 9 > Thucydides IV.75 . Rostovtzefl, Iranians and Greeks, p. 67, and von Stern, Hermes, 19 15 , vol. L , p. 202, mention a visit to the Pontic regions by Alkibiades. I can find evidence of a military expedition by Alkibi-ades only to the Propontis and the Thracian Bospho-rus (Kyzikos, Kalchedon, Byzantion, Chrysopolis) in 410-408 (Xenophon Hellenica I.i.16 fT., iii.2 ff .). 9 6 Rostovtzefl, Iranians and Greeks, p. 12: "The exist-ence of this kingdom [of the Cimmerian Bosphorus | was of capital importance before, during, and after the Peloponnesian war. The Bosphorus was sometimes the principal or the only centre of supply providing the Greek world with cereals and with fish."

1 2 9

R E F E R E N C E S C I T E D

Alexander, C. "Jewelry and Miscellaneous Small An-tiquities." Bulletin of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, July, 1925, vol. X X , pp. 180-183.

Beazley, J. D. Corpus vasorum antiquorum, Great Britain, fasc. 3, Oxford, iasc. 1, Ashmolean Museum. Oxford, 1927.

Benndorf, (). "Das Heroon von Gjolbaschi-Trysa." fahrbuch der \unsthistorischen Sammlung des al-ter hochsten Kaiserhauses, 1889, vol. IX, pp. 1-134; 1890, vol. XI , pp. 1-52; 1891, vol. XII , pp. 5-68; and 1889, vol. ot plates.

Borovka, G . Scythian Art. London, 1928. Borovka, ( ί . "Gutachten." Bulletin of the Bachstitz

Gallery, 1929, p. 36. Canessa, Ercole, Collection. An Important Collection

of Rare and Valuable Antiquities . . . Gathered by the Late Ercole Canessa. . . . American Art Associa-tion -—Anderson Galleries, Inc. New York, 1930.

Charbonneaux, ). Fouilles de Delphes, vol. II, fasc. 4, Le Sanctuaire d'Athena Pronaia, fasc. 2, La Tholos. Paris, 1925.

Ebert, M. Siidrussland im Altertum. Bonn and Leip-zig, 1921 .

Fettich, N . See R|einach |, S. Flandin, E., and Coste, P. Voyage en Perse, vol. II.

Paris, n.d. Fowler, Harold N., and Wheeler, fames R. A Hand-

booof Gree\ Archaeology. New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago, 1909.

Furtwiingler, A . Der Goldfund von Vettersfelde (Dreiundvierzi gstes Programm zum Wmckel-mannsfeste). Berlin, 1883.

"Gryps . " In Ausjiihrliches Lexicon der gne-chischen und romischen Mythologie, edited by W. H. Roscher, vol. I, part 2, cols. 1742-1777. Leipzig, 1886-1890.

"Erwerbungen der Antikensammlung in Deutschland. Antiquarium." ]ahrbuch des deut-schen archaologischen Instituts, Archiiologischer Anzeiger, 1892, vol. VI I , cols. 99-1 15.

Furtwiingler, Α., and Reichhold, K. Griechische Va-senmalerei, vols. I-III. Munich, 1904-1910.

Gow, A . S. F . "Notes on the Persae of Aeschylus." journal of Hellenic Studies, 1928, vol. X L V I I I , pp.

Graef, B. "Archaologische Beitrage." Hermes: Zeit-schrift fur classische Philologie, 1901, vol. X X X V I , pp. 81-106.

Hamdy Bey, O., and Reinach, T . Une Necropole royale a Sidon. Paris, 1892.

Head, Β. V . Historia numorum. Oxford, 191 1. Hill, G . F . Select Greet\ Coins. Paris and Brussels,

1927. Inscriptiones graecae, vol. I, Editio minor, edited by

F . Hiller von Gaertringen. Berlin, 1924.

Jacobsthal, P. Ornamente griechischer Vasen. Berlin, 1927.

Die melischen Reliefs. Berlin, 1931 . fahrbuch des deutschen archaologischen Instituts,

Archiiologischer Anzeiger, 1889, vol. IV, cols. 151-153. "Sitzungsberichte der archaolog. Gesellschaft zu Berlin: Juni" | resume of report by C. Robert on the gorytos from Nikopol |.

Kiepert, 1 1 , and R. Formae orbis antiqui. Berlin, T902. Kieseritzky, G . von. "Funde in Siidrussland." fahr-

buch des deutschen archaologischen Instituts, Ar-chiiologischer Anzeiger, 1903, voLXVI I I , cols. 81-85.

Kondakof, N., Tolstoi, )., and Reinach, S. Antiquites de la Russie meridionale. Paris, 1891.

Liier, H., and Creutz, M. Geschichte der Metall\unst, vol. II. Stuttgart, 1909.

Minns, Ε. H. Scythians and Greeks. Cambridge, 1913 . Monumenti inediti pubblicati dull' Instituto di corri-

spondenza archeologica, 1874-1878, vol. X, pi. X I V . Pharmakovsky, B. "Zolotyya obivki naluchi (goritov)

\y. Chertomlytskago kurgana i iz kurgana ν m. Ilyintsakh" (The Gold Mountings of the Bow Cases from the Chertomlyk and Ilyintsy Barrows). In Sborni/ζ archeologicheshj\h statey podnesenny Grafu A. A. Bobrins\omy ν den 25-letiya predsedat-elstva ye go ν Imperatorskoy Archeologiches\oy Kommissii, 1886-1911 (Miscellany of Archaeologi-cal Articles Presented to Count A. A. Bobrinskoy on the 25th Anniversary of His Presidency of the Imperial Archaeological Commission, 1886-1911) , pp. 45-118. St. Petersburg, 1 9 1 1 .

"Archaologische Funde im fahre 1913 . Russ-land." fahrbuch des deutschen archaologischen In-stituts, Archiiologischer Anzeiger, 1914, vol. X X I X , cols. 205-292.

"Tr i polichromnyye vazy ν forme statuetok, naydennyye ν Phanagorii" (Three Polychrome Vases in the Form of Statuettes, Found in Phana-goria). Z^apiskj Rossis/^oy A\ademii Istorii Materi-alnoy Kultury (Memoirs of the Russian Academy of the History of Material Civilization), 1921, part ι , pp. 1-44.

Polovtsofl, S. "Une Tombe de roi scythe." Revue archeologique, January - June, T914, series 4, vol. XXI I I , pp. 164-190.

Regling, Kurt. Der griechische Goldschatz von Prin-l(ipo (Museum der Altertiimer zu Istanbul). Ber-lin, 1931 .

R|einachJ, S. " | Review of | La Trouvaille scythe de Zoldhalompuszta pres de Miskole, Hongrie, by Nandor Fettich." Revue archeologique, January-June, 1929, series 5, vol. X X I X , pp. 205-207.

Richter, G. M. A. Animals in Greeks Sculpture. Ox-ford and New York, 1930.

— " A Greek Sword Sheath of a Scythian King."

I 12 M E T R O P O L I T A N M U S E U M S T U D I E S

Bulletin of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Feb-ruary, 1931, vol. X X V I , pp. 44-48.

Riegl, A. Stilfragen. Berlin, 1893. Robert, C. See Jahrbuch des deutschen archdologisch-

en Instituts. RostovtzeiT, M. Iranians and Creeps in South Russia.

Oxford, 1922. S\ythien und der Bosporus, vol. I: Kritische

LJbersicht der schriftlichen und archiiologischen Ouellen. Berlin, 1931 .

Salis, Λ . von. Das Grabmal des Aristonautes (Vier-undachtzigstes Programm zum Winckjelmanns-feste). Berlin, 1926.

Schede, M. Antilles Traufleisten-Ornament (Zur Kunstgeschichte des Auslandes, no. 67). Strasbourg, 1909.

Schreiber, T . Alexandrinische Toreutif{. Leipzig, 1894. Schroder, B. "Zu Mikons Gemalde der Marathon-

schlacht in der Stoa Poikile." jahrbuch des deut-schen archiiologischen Instituts, 1 9 1 1 , vol. X X V I , pp. 281-288.

Smith, Λ. H . A Catalogue of Sculpture in the De-partment of Greeh^ and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, vol. I. London, 1892.

Stephani, L. "Erklarung einiger im Jahre 1863 im sudlichen Russland gefundenen Gegenstiinde." In Compte-rendu de la Commission imperiale arche-ologique pour I'annee 1864, pp. 3-246. St. Peters-burg, 1865.

Stern, E. von. "Die politische und sociale Struktur der Griechencolonien am Nordufer des Schvvarzmeer-gebietes." Hermes: Zeitschrift jiir classische Phi-lologie, 1915, vol. L , pp. 161 if.

Stevens, (ί . P., Caskey, L . D., Fowler, Η. N., and Paton, J. M. The Erechtheum. Cambridge (Mass.), 1927.

Technau, W. "Griechische Keramik im samischen Heraion." Mitteilungen des deutschen archiiolo-gischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung, 1929, vol. L IV , p. 44, fig. 32, i .

Waldhauer, O. "Die Silbervase von Nikopol." In Antike Den\maler, vol. IV, no. 9, pp. 83-90. Berlin,

Ziegler. "Gryps." In Paulys Real-Encyclopiidie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, edited by Georg Wissowa and Wilhelm Kroll, vol. VII , cols. 1902-1929. Stuttgart, 1912 .